Abstract
In recent years, both empirical trials and the popular media have advocated for the use of standing breaks – short, purposeful bouts of activity – to mitigate the deleterious effects of sedentary behaviour (SB). While strategies like "stand when talking on the phone" are intuitively appealing, research has yet to examine whether individuals perceive such strategies as being realistic and desirable. The current study examined perceptions of standing breaks in office workers. Participants (N=344) from multiple workplaces completed a prospective questionnaire which assessed standing break engagement, reactions to eight specific standing break strategies, and Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) constructs. Overall, the eight standing break strategies were rated as being moderately realistic (M=4.9/7, SD=2.23), though MANOVAR indicated significant between-strategy variation (Wilk's ?=0.628, p<0.001). "Stretching after a task" was rated as being most realistic, whereas "standing meetings" as being least realistic. TPB constructs accounted for 58.8% of the variance in ratings of strategy realisticness, and 19.7% of variance in willingness to try a strategy, ps<0.05. Time-1 perceptions of realisticness/willingness were weakly associated with Time-2 standing break behaviour, and moderately associated with participants' reported enjoyment of a strategy. While standing breaks were generally well received by office workers, there exists substantial between-strategy variability. Moreover, simply supporting a given standing break strategy is not sufficient to prompt engagement. Further research on the psychosocial factors that shape standing break behaviour is needed, such as why some break strategies are better received, and whether such factors predict strategy use.Acknowledgments: CRC Student Training Funds